Protest Runway (sorry, bad pun)

November 13, 2008 6:23 AM

[GayDC_Filter] Should I go to the protests this Saturday? (See explanation)

Personal facts:
-I'm gay
-I'm 100% for same-sex marriage, anti-discrimination laws, hate crimes legislation, etc. [the grab bag of "equal rights"]
-I'm in DC

External facts:
-California passed proposition 8, banning same-sex marriage (in a state that actually had it)
-There is a nation-wide protest on Saturday (although directly-related to the passage of prop 8, this is being touted as the start of the "national gay rights movement," etc.)

Concerns:
-Umm, this was passed in California. Not DC. Not VA (although VA did ban gay marriage 3 years ago).
-A lot of the anti-Mormon sentiment at these protests make me feel a little uneasy (funding from the LDS being blamed for Prop 8's passage by many gays, liberals, etc.). It's just another brand of bigotry.
-Speaking of bigotry, there is the factor of potential racial tension, as many outspoken commentators in the gay community have (erroneously) pinned Prop 8's passage on California Latinos & Blacks. I doubt this would really flare up in any significant way, but, ya know, it's on my mind.

So what should I do? I support the general cause all the way....but I'm not in California. What's the point? I don't want to show up for a cause and then find myself surrounded by feel-good morons who cause harm and make no progress.

(sorry for the babble--I'm truly conflicted)

posted by Franklin76 to Society & Culture (29 answers total)

I'm in the exact same boat as you are in New Orleans. I'm all for showing my support, but can anybody actually point to how this support will help?
posted by bookwo3107 at 6:40 AM on November 13, 2008

Um, what?? Are you really saying that only the people who are in the geographic location of the discrimination should care enough to show their opposition to that discrimination?
posted by SuperSquirrel at 6:46 AM on November 13, 2008 [3 favorites]

The protests aren't just about Prop. 8, but also the other anti-marriage laws that passed this November, as well as the laws that have passed over the last few election cycles. It's a show of national support for pseudo-local issues.

A lot of the anti-Mormon sentiment at these protests make me feel a little uneasy

I don't see it as "anti-Mormon" sentiment. After all, there were several Mormon-based organizations who urged Mormons to vote against Prop. 8. Most people see it as a violation of IRS tax laws for a federally-exempt organization (ie, charities and churches) to donate significant sums of money from the church coffer to help a specific candidate or issue pass or fail. There will be a lot of sentiment to that effect expressed at the protests - if the LDS church wants to directly affect laws in that manner, then they should follow the same rules as everyone else and be taxed on their business profits. That's all.

Speaking of bigotry, there is the factor of potential racial tension

Wouldn't it be better to flood these protests with people who think like you, and are willing to say so, than with people who are misinformed and blame blacks and latinos?
posted by muddgirl at 6:47 AM on November 13, 2008 [1 favorite]

The fun about protests is that you can always carry a sign that says exactly what you think, maybe something like "Let's stop the blame and fix this!"...or something less lame. It might give you the opportunity to talk to people and make some constructive change.
posted by Alison at 6:49 AM on November 13, 2008

Best answer: The state argument would make more sense if it weren't in D.C., and as you say, a national protest. The fact that D.C. doesn't currently support same-sex marriage would seem to be a reason to go, if only to raise visibility for the issue.

As far as bigotry goes - you're responsible for your own choices. If it's a matter of latent sentiment, you can use the protest as an opportunity to talk to other gay-rights activists about the Mormons, and call people out when they jump on the bandwagon.

On the other hand, if you feel like the bigotry is getting systemic [that is, if it's really concretely slipped over from pro-rights to anti-Mormon] it makes sense to boycott the protest -- but you'd be missing an opportunity to speak out against an issue that is important (and also involves a lot of bigotry) in a public forum where it could potentially carry a good deal of weight.
posted by puckish at 7:03 AM on November 13, 2008 [1 favorite]

After all, there were several Mormon-based organizations who urged Mormons to vote against Prop. 8. Most people see it as a violation of IRS tax laws for a federally-exempt organization...

"...the LDS Church mobilized in favor of California's Proposition 8, a ballot initiative that bans gay marriage. Mormons donated $19 million to the cause -- nearly four out of five dollars [80%] raised."

According to IRS law:

Section 501(c)(3) describes corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literacy, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in section (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distribution of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.

From IRS Publication 1828 Page 5 [PDF]:

Substantial Lobbying Activity
In general, no organization, including a church, may qualify for IRC section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying). An IRC section 501(c)(3) organization may engage in some lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks loss of tax-exempt status.

Mormons Stole Our Rights [official site and petition].
posted by ericb at 7:07 AM on November 13, 2008

Response by poster: I'll try to say these as briefly as possible:

@SuperSquirrel: Umm, yes, I "care enough." I threw money to the anti-Prop 8 cause in California (and I have ZERO ties to that state). I just graduated from college, it's not like I have bucks to toss around. You still haven't explained how me demonstrating in liberal old DC is going to help out.

@Sondrialiac, Alison + Muddgirl: You all have good answers, but protests aren't legislatures--it's not like everyone's voice is equal. What matters most is what an outsider sees. If there's some bastard running around with a "Fuck Mormons!" sign, even if I confront them on it (which, if I have to confront gay activists at a pro-gay protest, I already feel like I'm in sketchy water), outsiders will already have informed their impression of what we stand for.

I doubt I'll have the opportunity for some cinematic "No, my fellow gays, see the light of tolerance for Mormons!" moment. It's mostly just going to be a clusterfuck of people with signs and chants.

@Ericb: So they funded it. Do you know how many Mormons there are in California? Not enough to pass the damn thing. Big donors in Florida and New York are responsible for a lot of Democratic gains in Congress, but I'm pretty sure we'd agree that "JEWS STOLE OUR CONGRESS" would be pretty bigoted on first sight.
posted by Franklin76 at 7:16 AM on November 13, 2008

Response by poster: And so what if it's a violation of IRS and tax laws? Shouldn't I be filing a complaint with a federal agency instead of holding a sign?
posted by Franklin76 at 7:19 AM on November 13, 2008

Franklin76 -- for background and to see why this has become a nationwide affair, check out the Join the Impact website.

Also, check out online converage of the movement: here and here, among other places.

Many of those in power in California (L.A. County Board of Supervisors Votes To Join Prop. 8 Lawsuit || 44 California State Legislators Seek to Overturn Prop. 8) agree that it is wrong to remove the rights granted earlier this year and they seek to overturn the vote, including Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger:

"I think that the people of California just again have spoken on this issue and they went against it. Just like in the year 2000 when they voted against it with Proposition 22. They had a very, very strong campaign the pro- Prop 8 people, and I think that the people that tried to defeat it did not have maybe as good a campaign or as much money behind it. Whatever. I think it is unfortunate obviously but it's not the end because I think this will go back into the courts, this will go back to the Supreme Court because the Supreme Court very clearly in California has declared this unconstitutional. It's the same as in the 1948 case when blacks and whites were not allowed to marry. So I think that we will again maybe undo that, if the court is willing to do that, and then move forward from there and again lead in that area."

The fact that a majority voted to remove the rights of a minority should be of concern to all Americans. Let all our voices be heard. Standing up together brings focus to the issues at hand. I choose to be among those on the "right side of history." Won't you join us?
posted by ericb at 7:24 AM on November 13, 2008 [4 favorites]

What matters most is what an outsider sees.

I agree. First and foremost, visibility counts. The protests to date have been peaceful. Check out coverage of last night's event in NYC, including reports from those who attended.

but protests aren't legislatures

Again, I agree. But, peaceful protests bring issues to the public square. People take notice. Focus on issues allows for discussion and debate. Those of us in Massachusetts and Connecticut could decide to stay home, but we aren't going to. We're marching on Saturday to show solidarity and that we will speak up and out until everyone else in our country receives the same rights, privileges and benefiits that we do.
posted by ericb at 7:36 AM on November 13, 2008

So they funded it. Do you know how many Mormons there are in California? Not enough to pass the damn thing.

Granted, in some cities the start of the protests has been in front of Mormon temples -- a convenient focus for mobilizing, I guess. But, in the end these are protests for equal rights and not primarily against the LDS.
posted by ericb at 7:43 AM on November 13, 2008

Best answer: I really don't see where the problem is. you go to protest to bear witness and to do your part in making the event as big -- ie, as relevant in the media -- as possible. DC, California, Alaska, you're still gay. and if DC had gay marriage, those fucks would organize themselves to take that right away from you in a second. somebody yells something racist or inappropriate? you can boo them. most people will disagree with bigoted or racist stuff, don't worry. after all, it's not the gays who took rights away from the Mormons, after all. it's the other way around so let's not start blaming the victims.

if anything, try to disprove this crap meme that it's the gays who are the meanies because they're unkind to the good nice Mormons who organized, against the law as you can read above, as a political entity to take rights away from other citizens. go, be polite, but firm in your condemnation of what has happened with Prop8.

go and actively protest the injustice that has been perpetrated. God knows I'd join you, if I were there. it's a slam dunk, really.

and by the way, if you hear some well-meaning protester yell stuff like "fucking inbred Mormon motherfuckers", explain them that it's more useful to actively lobby the IRS to begin taxing their homophobic Mormon asses.
posted by matteo at 7:49 AM on November 13, 2008 [7 favorites]

They had a very, very strong campaign the pro- Prop 8 people, and I think that the people that tried to defeat it did not have maybe as good a campaign or as much money behind it.

The Yes-On-8 was a highly-funded campaign based on falsehoods -- repeated again-and-again in television/radio ads, pamphlets, etc.

Facts v. Fiction:

*****
Fiction: Prop 8 doesn’t discriminate against gay people.

Fact: Prop 8 is simple: it eliminates the rights for same-sex couples to marry. Prop 8 would deny equal protections and write discrimination against one group of people—lesbian and gay people—into our state constitution.

*****
Fiction: Teaching children about same-sex marriage will happen here unless we pass Prop 8.

Fact: Not one word in Prop 8 mentions education. And no child can be forced, against the will of their parents, to be taught anything about health and family issues at school. California law prohibits it. California’s top educators including Superintendent of Schools Jack O’Connell and California Teachers all agree: Prop 8 has nothing to do with education.

*****
Fiction: Churches could lose their tax-exemption status.

Fact: The court decision regarding marriage specifically says “no religion will be required to change its religious policies or practices with regard to same-sex couples, and no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.”

*****
Fiction: A Massachusetts case about a parent’s objection to the school curriculum will happen here.

Fact: California gives parents an absolute right to remove their kids and opt-out of teaching on health and family instruction they don’t agree with. The opponents know that California law already covers this and Prop 8 won’t affect it, so they bring up an irrelevant case in Massachusetts.

*****
Fiction: Four Activist Judges in San Francisco…

Fact: Prop 8 is about eliminating a fundamental right. Judges didn’t grant the right, the constitution guarantees the right. Proponents of Prop 8 use an outdated and stale argument that judges aren’t supposed to protect rights and freedoms. Prop 8 is about whether Californians are willing to amend the constitution for the sole purpose of eliminating a fundamental right for one group of citizens.

*****
Fiction: If Prop 8 isn’t passed, people can be sued over personal beliefs.

Fact: California’s laws already prohibit discrimination against anyone based on race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. This has nothing to do with marriage.

*****
Fiction: Pepperdine University supports the Yes on 8 campaign.

Fact: The University has publicly disassociated itself from Professor Richard Peterson of Pepperdine University, who is featured in the ad, and has asked to not be identified in the Yes on 8 advertisements.

*****
Fiction: Unless Prop 8 passes, California parents won’t have the right to object to what their children are taught in school.

Fact: California law clearly gives parents and guardians broad authority to remove their children from any health instruction if it conflicts with their religious beliefs or moral convictions.

These organized protests are an opportunity to get the facts out via free media coverage and neighbors, friends and family talking.
posted by ericb at 7:50 AM on November 13, 2008

These organized protests are an opportunity to get the facts out via free media coverage and neighbors, friends and family talking.

Exactly. I don't think it's productive to blame the No on 8 campaign - they did the best they could with what the had - few politicians were willing to step up and film commercials, most people thought it would fail easily and did not donate their time and money the way they did to the Obama campaign. No on 8 also made some critical errors, such as failing to reach out to minority activist organizations, or LGBT-of-color organizations, but again I feel this was based on faulty research, rather than some inherent anti-black bias amongst gay people. But now isn't the time for finger-pointing, and by and large the spirit of these protests ISN'T about laying the blame on any group; it's about visibility and community.

It looks to me like you're looking for an excuse not to attend. If you're heart isn't in it, then don't go.
posted by muddgirl at 8:02 AM on November 13, 2008

Response by poster: @EricB--I know all about Prop 8, how it came to pass, and what's happening in the Cali aftermath. No clarity needed. I get it.

It looks to me like you're looking for an excuse not to attend.

That may be true--but my heart is very much in it. It's my mind that I'm trying to square away.
posted by Franklin76 at 8:06 AM on November 13, 2008

I considered going to the protest in NYC last night, but decided not to, largely because of this post on Andrew Sullivan's blog, which I think makes an excellent case for not targeting the LDS church specifically. I think that the primary effect of protests, even peaceful ones, on the people whose minds need to be changed the most, is to frighten them. And they're already frightened of gay people and gay rights. So, to my mind at least, taking to the streets is not necessarily the most effective strategy.

Personally, I'm leaning toward the "wait for the old bigots to die off" method, but I'm a little lazy...
posted by doift at 8:10 AM on November 13, 2008

Best answer: I didn't say YOU, the OP, didn't care enough. It sounded to me that you were making the statement that only gay people in CA should protest, because only gay people in CA should care. Apologies for misunderstanding you.

I think there are two general types of approaches to situations like this: the symbolic (going to protests, writing blog posts, calling for boycotts, etc.) and the more ... I guess ... active (or practical or grassroots?), which in my mind means making cash donations, walking a neighborhood and knocking on doors, or speaking to a specific person in an attempt to change his/her mind.

Both approaches are good and necessary and accomplish much, and I would say that no good cause succeeds without both tools. But one approach might fit your personality or outlook or current situation better. If attending a protest doesn't seem like a good idea for you now, for whatever reason, then don't. Do something else that works better. But do something. The fight may be in CA now, but someday, it will be in DC, and you'd want the CA gays to have your back then, wouldn't you?
posted by SuperSquirrel at 8:51 AM on November 13, 2008

Best answer: I think this is a interesting question. It reminds me of this post on the blue: "The anti-war movement thinks that a strategy is holding a demonstration on a street corner, holding hands, lighting candles and singing Kumbia... No, that's not a strategy. That may qualify as a tactic. But a tactic divorced from strategy is just the 'noise before defeat.'"

So, the question is -- how are these protests part of an actual campaign strategy? (Nine questions to ask to plan an advocacy campaign strategy.) The tricky part is that nobody is going to post their whole strategy on the web. (Actually, they probably are hashing it out somewhere like dKos right now; I just haven't seen it myself.)

But looking at the press coverage, at least one way the story is getting covered is (LA Times) "no one group organized the protest, it is emerging spontaneously out of the grassroots, from a new generation communicating through internet sites like Facebook." Campaign strategy: convince fence-sitting people and even some who voted "yes" that marriage equality is The Future, it's forward-looking, it's what the youth of today and the future generations want.

Because some of the protests focus on LDS churches, another way the story is getting covered is "people angrily protest against the Mormon backers of Prop 8" (I saw a press release refer to them as the "Mormon cult"). This could make future marriage bans seem like attempts by religious extremists to control politics. It has also put the church on the defensive and gotten those in the Mormon church who support gay marriage to be more vocal about their support. Since churches have been such an important organizing tool for the marriage bans, the more churches are split, the better.

So, the tactics do seem to be useful.

But you're right that there's a risk. It seems important now to keep the protests positive, since the campaign leaders on the other side are saying things like: "I think the 'No on 8' forces have devolved into mob justice." (--Jeff Flint, a campaign strategist for the "Yes" side, in the Santa Rosa Press Democrat, which leans conservative). That's a common way people dismiss protests, so it's worth coming up with good answers to it and organizing protests that don't play into that framing.

Still, I'd say go protest! Help keep it peaceful and respectful. Be the guy who gets quoted who says something positive about civil rights and love for everyone.
posted by salvia at 9:06 AM on November 13, 2008

Response by poster: Thanks to everyone for their input--this is clearly emotional for me, so I apologize if I was...a bit dickish?

Great thread. Much appreciated.
posted by Franklin76 at 9:22 AM on November 13, 2008

And so what if it's a violation of IRS and tax laws? Shouldn't I be filing a complaint with a federal agency instead of holding a sign?

So, research how people can file such a complaint, and hand out a flyer to anyone spouting anti-Mormon garbage.
posted by desjardins at 9:55 AM on November 13, 2008

Best answer: If I were you, I'd go. If the protest you're at becomes too hateful towards others, leave.
posted by jenfullmoon at 10:53 AM on November 13, 2008

Best answer: We go because we need to put show a face to those who chose to discriminate.

Anyone can be LGBT. A lot of the times, it's not something that's immediately obvious. For instance, you know when you're talking to an African-American, but you probably don't know when you're talking to a bisexual girl unless she tells you. Many people may have a gay neighbor, coworker, or family member, but have no idea.

It's a lot easier to discriminate against an idea. "Those people are weird, doing unnatural things." Because it's not tangible, it's easier to not feel guilty, or to feel justified that your discrimination is the right thing. It's a lot harder to imagine who your vote affects.

It's more difficult to think "My vote here will revoke the marriage of Chris and Alex who live the floor above me."

The protest is one way to show that you belong to, or support, those who were discriminated. It's something that lasts for longer than just the hours that you're there. It can spark conversation -- "What'd you get up to this weekend?" "I went to the gay rights protest." The ripples of supporting may be small for some, grand for others, but little by little it adds a face. It might make people think twice about their actions and who they affect. It might make people feel supported, that they're not alone. It might give people courage to go knock on doors and talk to more people face to face.

And as a 24 year old Californian lesbian, who's entire family is Mormon, I'm going to prove to myself that I'm stronger than their pity, their fear.
posted by Nerro at 11:36 AM on November 13, 2008 [1 favorite]

So, research how people can file such a complaint, and hand out a flyer to anyone spouting anti-Mormon garbage.

Good idea. Make a flier to hand out. Take relevant info from this website and encourage people to sign the online petition located there, etc.

You can also source detailed info from the formal complaint that was filed today "with the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) against the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) aka the Mormon Church of Salt Lake City, Utah for not reporting various non monetary contributions to ProtectMarriage.com – Yes on 8, A Project of California Renewal I.D. # 1302592."

How about inclusion in the flier of the following quote made by Mormon Prophet Brigham Young?

"Marriage is a civil contract. You might as well make a law to say how many children a man shall have, as to make a law to say how many wives he shall have. (Journal of Discourses, 11:268-9)"

I'd say that's a conversation starter. What a way to start healthy discourse and debate. Get people's opinions on the difference between civil marriage and religious marriage. Is the current stance by today's Mormons in conflict with that of one of their faith's founding fathers?, etc.
posted by ericb at 12:01 PM on November 13, 2008

Response by poster: @Nerro--coming from a family of Iranians, I hear ya, friend.

But my concern remains: What you spoke of--neighbors and friends being open and vocal about who they are, how prop 8 hurts them, bringing them into the tangible light, etc....that doesn't really happen at a "protest" per se. That happens from carefully timed conversations, going door-to-door, maybe coming out at your place of employment, etc.

If the things you described were going to happen at the protest, I'd be there 100%--but that's not what will be happening. It'll be a gathering of all LGBTs & their allies...but the targeted "groups" will obviously not be there. It's not like we're demonstrating at a shopping mall or a subway station and chatting it up.

BUT this is a PROTEST--and that's where I feel a bit of disconnect. Virtually everyone there will be in agreement. Do we think that passer-bys and casual local TV watchers will be deeply struck by this demonstration?

Are we using 1960s tactics for 21st-century movements?
posted by Franklin76 at 12:12 PM on November 13, 2008

Yes, go protest.
posted by history is a weapon at 12:50 PM on November 13, 2008

The point of these protests (I am helping to organizing the St. Louis protest) is to bring together the local LGBT community and their allies, to provide direction for angry young LGBT folks who have not previously been involved in LGBT activism, to show solidarity with California, Arizona, Florida, and Arkansas LGBT who had civil rights taken away in the recent election, and to jump start the LGBT Movement for Civil Rights in this country.

Of course you should attend, we need tactics from every era to make the movement. The largest organizing for the St. Louis event is being done on Facebook and MySpace. And, we are planning to march through the Downtown area where we will see those targeted "groups".
posted by hworth at 12:52 PM on November 13, 2008

Best answer: I think that the rest of the answers have provided you a lot of helpful info, and I just wanted to add my perspective as someone who has been at two of the larger protests in CA. To be quite honest, I was uncomfortable with the targeting of the Mormon Temple in LA (although I was there, I didn't really think about it before I got there, just wanted to support gay rights) mostly because I felt like people really took it as an opportunity to make fun of Mormons, which isn't cool. There were a lot of signs like "I only want one wife!" and things like that. I understand the anger, but I don't think using stereotypes back against the Mormons is productive.

However. I went to the second large protest at Sunset Junction in LA and was heartened to see much less of this sentiment. I think that after that initial angry period where people were just getting their feelings out, people realized that attacking the Mormons wasn't going to get them their rights back. The group at Sunset Junction was also very racially diverse.

The racial diversity of that march brings me to my next point: at neither of these events did I witness any racial animosity. Obviously I'm not everywhere, watching everything, but the mood was overwhelmingly positive. To tell the truth, I feel like the "gays hate blacks for taking away their rights" meme is something created by the media along with a few people (like Dan Savage) that the media picked up on as speaking for all gay people.

So, I don't think that you'll find yourself surrounded by morons who cause harm. My two cents.
posted by wuzandfuzz at 1:18 PM on November 13, 2008

What's a 21st century tactic? More technologically based? More money spent on well-crafted TV adverts and banner ads on conservative websites?

Nothing shows how a mass of people feel like a protest. Online petitions and websites in general are just a lot of nice graphics and a bunch of words, and fall back on the issue of "that's no one I know." But when you see hundreds or thousands gathered and marching for or against one cause, that's a lot of people backing a cause.

Of course, the bigger the crowds, the bigger the publicity. The more publicity, the more who know who weren't there.

But the more who were there, the more who can tell others they were there. Not to preach on street corners "I marched in the Gay Rights march on Saturday! Where were you?" but to tell co-workers and friends. Maybe you wait until someone asks how your weekend was, or maybe you saw something moving at the march. Maybe you felt it took a turn towards the negative, and you write an editorial for a newspaper. Or you can blog about it.

I don't think marching is no longer effective - it may not seem too radical now, or it may seem that the results are too slow, but this isn't something that can be changed with the flip of a switch or another million dollars alone.
posted by filthy light thief at 2:41 PM on November 13, 2008

Wrap-ups and photos/videos from Prop. 8 rallies/marches across the country today - 1, 2, 3, 4.

Here in Boston, despite the rain, there was a large turnout | video.
posted by ericb at 4:23 PM on November 15, 2008